Maybe this feature is in there, so please enlighten me otherwise. But I noticed sometimes it's hard to tell if you're within "attackable" range of an enemy unit. Yes, I see that you can select the enemy, and see their possible movement range circle, and you can also toggle their attack range, but the attack range circles are centered around the unit, which doesn't really help that much.

What would really help is an aggregate circle of their combined movement range and their attack range. I feel since the game doesn't have a grid system (which is fine) it becomes difficult to tell if I'm out of that archer's range for next turn. And I find myself using my fingers up to my TV to estimate the distance beyond his movement range... which is kinda silly.

Again if this feature exists already, let me know, but I feel like I've gotten burned a few times because I thought I was just beyond an attack range, but was off by a few pixels.

So, the only way to check if a unit can attack another one with 100% accuracy is to activate them and move around and see if the enemy flashes. You can then cancel the movement and the order given (just don't move another unit or act, you can't undo after that).

There's no way to preview something like if an enemy can attack you on your turn. This is quite complex to do with 100% accuracy (which is kind of necessary), so that's why me made it a core part of advanced gameplay - if you want to get better at the game you have to get better at gauging what the enemy can do to you.

I feel like claiming a 'core part of advanced gameplay' as being able to estimate an arbitrary game distance is a little silly. It's not like in chess I look at a knight and wonder if he's going to be able attack my pieces next turn. I either know he can, or I know he can't and I form my strategy around that knowledge.

Also, given that most of your per-unit travel distances are set radially from the movement start point (and are not limited as an actual distance-travelled) I think an effective range circle, while maybe not 100% correct due to terrain variances, etc, would still be very useful. It's not like the move distance circle you currently provide is 100% accurate anyway. For example, if I'm standing next to a wall, you still draw a movement circle all the way around my unit even if there's no way for me to reach the edge of the wall to move around it.

And that's fine, technically if all that stuff was to be 100% accurate you'd deform the move potential area to follow the terrain features, and I understand the complexity there. But that's not what I'm asking for. And with that being the case, I just feel like showing how far a character can move, plus the distance of their main attack, in a aggregate circle, wouldn't be that absurd to implement. But obviously I didn't design the software, so that's a pretty blind assumption on my part.

It's an issue of finesse - much like the physics knockback, you don't know exactly how far you're going to knock a guy, what he might bounce off of, etc. As you get better at the game, you learn to judge distances (and sometimes coming reeeeeally close but not making it is super dramatic). While Skulls has a lot of similarities to chess (handful of basic unit types that give you a lot of variety, etc), it definitely is *not* chess.

Yeah, the technical limitation is such that it would be easy to show *something*, but getting that something to be 100% accurate is the hard part (and in fact may not really be achievable without reworking most of the movement system). Since in every case when you show you something, that is 100% accurate, we've also avoided this because it would break that rule, too.

I've personally found very little issue with this function (or lack of). Borut is correct when he says that over time you will become better at determining the range of enemy units. I feel that adding this to the game would make it easier to turtle, which is not what this game is about. If you want to guarantee a unit is safe from an archer, get behind a spirit wall or cover, it's really not that difficult. Also: You are never going to play a game without being hit at least once.

I'm not entirely against this, but I find it unnecessary and a bit too much of a luxury.Just my ten cents;~Durgrobach

I agree with everything Durgrobach said. Sometimes you just have to take chances and roll the dice. Its already a pretty great luxury that you can retry your whole turn an infinite number of times before you submit your move.